TV Tropes Org

Forums

On-Topic Conversations:
Does everyone fit the term bigot?
search forum titles
google site search
Total posts: [33]  1
2

Does everyone fit the term bigot?:

 26 Usht, Thu, 26th May '11 2:56:28 PM from an arbitrary view point.
Lv. 3 Genasi Wizard
I like it when posts provide proof for me without even trying. So then, here's the question, nzm, would you have been bigoted towards the Nazis on their own or was that a result of everyone else around you constantly talking about how terrible of people they are?

That's not to say they didn't do terrible things, but would you have actually directed such a level of prejudice towards the name "Nazi" if people weren't constantly point out how evil they were? How about the Spanish Inquisition? They were on par if not above the Nazi level of evil though not as wide spread but you probably don't hear about them and so don't have a negative disposition.

So where am I coming from? When you've got two well defined groups that oppose each other, as with, say, Democrats and Republicans, it becomes a shouting match that if you're caught up in, has a tendency to make you bigoted. The same goes for any other two opposing groups that you get caught up in with the fighting, say... the religious folk against the atheists, the console wars, etc. And so it eventually becomes normal to having little echo boxes across the world and the internet of people insulting each other and continuing flame wars. That's not to say you shouldn't choose to have a strong opinion, I'm just saying it's very easy to get caught up in having a strong opinion.

So no, not everyone a bigot, just those stuck in the middle of a mob. Sounds good?
The thing about making witty signature lines is that it first needs to actually be witty.
 27 Bobby G, Thu, 26th May '11 5:26:52 PM from the Silvery Tay
vigilantly taxonomish
I'm not sure about even then. Being in the middle of a mob obviously causes bigotry-like behaviour, but like I said, that doesn't seem to line up with how the term is actually used.

Incidentally, between 1480 and 1834, it's estimated that between 3,000 and 5,000 people were executed in the name of Catholicism in Spain, whereas the Holocaust killed, depending on how you define it, between 11 million and 17 million people in the space of less than a decade.

Not saying the Spanish Inquisition wasn't bad, but just trying to put things into perspective here. The Nazis were far from the only mass-murderers in history, but they are infamous for a reason.
Over 10,000 dead.:<
The term bigot has gotten a bit politically corrected. Kind of like people have overly racialized the term "civil rights".

Whatever my real opinions on race and sex and sexuality and class and every other big issue or little issue. I can be pretty bigoted. I often challenge myself and consider the opinions of others pretty strongly. On the other hand, knowing how subjective opinions are, I figure, why skimp out on myself? If there's no true moral wrong or right, then my opinion and desires are the most important one. Kind of like the revelation of Atheism often leads people to saying, "if there's no God, and therefor no afterlife, I should try to use what little life I have to the best of my happiness". I've tied myself pretty closely to the things which I desire, and they don't particularly have to have a greater meaning since I don't believe in one. My desires for interculturalism and sexual equality and fellowship all rely on some selfish desire to see the world something my beautiful to me while I'm alive. And it doesn't matter whether my desires seem "base" or "lofty" because it is all the same to me. Making for some very strange treatings of my liking androgyny and not liking gender roles and sexism as too similar to make many people morally uncomfortable and trivializing big issues.

This makes me interpret the world in an almost "will to power" fashion, that one of the primary human motivations in a morally subjective world, is influence. Maybe not necessarily the same interpretations of kindness and power than Nietzsche, but similar enough that I view influence as one of the many primary human desires. And the kindest thing I can do to myself is try to live my life for myself and what makes me happy before all, and seek influence to fill this desire beyond any contraints of people claiming there are absolute morals that conflict with my desires. Which can make me, again, pretty inconsiderate of my differences from others even down to personal taste. Because I realize that even taste means something in terms of market and being catered to. My existence is pushing against the existence of all others, some a bit complementary to my desires, but many not. And so to be true to myself, it would be natural to promote my desires and all that is me, while marginalizing all that conflicts. Of course, you can only have so much influence without money and power, but a human being is a vote and a ripple for themselves should they choose to represent themselves instead of suppress themselves. So there's no point that benefits oneself to not promote the self and marginalize the other. Just as there is no point in living for a God, if one is living in a universe without a God. In this sense, it is only logical for all humans to be bigots. As we all want more of what we want and should logically seek that, which is promoting the self and marginalizing the other on some level. It does happen that some bigotry does not serve the self, though. This can of course be depressing when you are a minority, but you can always cause ripples and try to change the world to work more in your favor, if even by 0.00000001%. The world is a tug-of-war of clashing desires. The only way to win, is to be louder. There is only so much one person can do, but it is better than suppressing the self.

I suppose this is another one of those posts that people would find to be a bit "insane" and "on drugs". I can again see how my post might be seen as confusing. But there really isn't a better way of putting this.
Genkidama for Japan, even if you don't have money, you can help![1]
Incidentally, between 1480 and 1834, it's estimated that between 3, 000 and 5, 000 people were executed in the name of Catholicism in Spain, whereas the Holocaust killed, depending on how you define it, between 11 million and 17 million people in the space of less than a decade.

Population sizes were smaller back then, though.

Incidentally, Stalin killed more people than Hitler did, but people didn't pay attention because he was part of the Allies.
If I'm asking for advice on a story idea, don't tell me it can't be done.
 30 Bobby G, Sat, 28th May '11 7:11:59 AM from the Silvery Tay
vigilantly taxonomish
A lot of people deliberately turned a blind eye to Stalin's purges, even.

I'd elaborate on why I don't think the Spanish Inquisition is directly comparable to either Hitler or Stalin, but we're off-topic.
[up][up][up][up][up]Nazis were just an example here. I don't like their views not because of what people think but because I'm generally opposed to violent dictatorships and I think that genocide is extremely evil. That said, I think that, for example, stalinists are just as evil as nazis. I don't really care about popular opinions, I come to my own conclusions (of course other opinions are an influence, but not the deciding factor)
"Take your (...) hippy dream world, I'll take reality and earning my happiness with my own efforts" - Barkey
 32 Usht, Sat, 28th May '11 12:02:58 PM from an arbitrary view point.
Lv. 3 Genasi Wizard
Eh, okay Nazis to the Spanish Inquisition was a bad comparison. I suppose Nazis and Stalinists would be a better comparison seeing as Stalin had lots of innocents killed at his order but is largely considered better than the Nazis due to him siding with the Allies.

So this is where the term bigot comes in. You only dislike the Nazis more than Stalin and his underlings because people pointed to the Nazis more often. The same goes for any situation where it's you against me, whether that be war, politics, or what have you. If that occurs, it must follow that you're right, otherwise why are you two even fighting? Since you're right, it does not immediately follow that the other person is wrong, but due to the whole shouting match going on, it usually follows as such. If you're a democrat, you might get caught up in those that are constantly pointing out how wrong the republicans are. If you follow with the shouting, chances are you'll narrow things down into us and them and thus become a bigot because you've failed to notice the numerous other views that may also be right, or even the ones that you're shouting down that might not be wrong.

Basically, I see bigots appearing when they get to busy forwarding their own beliefs and agendas that they forget to look around.
The thing about making witty signature lines is that it first needs to actually be witty.
 33 Edmania, Sat, 28th May '11 10:06:34 PM from under a pile of erasers
o hai
Convinced of the superiority or correctness of one's own opinions and prejudiced against those who hold different opinions

Don't know about everyone, but definitely most humans.
If people learned from their mistakes, there wouldn't be this thing called bad habits.
The system doesn't know you right now, so no post button for you.
You need to Get Known to get one of those.
Total posts: 33
 1
2


TV Tropes by TV Tropes Foundation, LLC is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-ShareAlike 3.0 Unported License.
Permissions beyond the scope of this license may be available from thestaff@tvtropes.org.
Privacy Policy